As Denmark navigates a changing global landscape, the preparedness of its municipalities for potential crises, such as attacks on vital infrastructure or armed conflict, has come under scrutiny. According to a March 19, 2025, report from DR, the level of assistance Danes can expect in emergencies varies significantly from one municipality to another.
In some areas, local governments have ensured vulnerable citizens are equipped with supplies to last at least three days, including non-perishable food items like crackers and canned mackerel, drinking water, toilet paper, and batteries. In sharp contrast, other municipalities lack any formal plans or stockpiles to support their residents during an emergency.
For example, in Syddjurs Kommune, local authorities have proactively instructed care facilities to prepare for an extended crisis by stocking essential items such as headlamps and plastic cutlery. Mayor Michael Stegger Jensen emphasizes, “Instead of being caught off guard, it’s about ensuring we are well-prepared.” Residents in Syddjurs can expect to maintain comfort even amidst disruptions.
However, other municipalities, like Sønderborg Kommune, have not made similar investments in crisis management resources. Mayor Erik Lauritzen explained that his town has not been putting extra funding toward emergency supplies, highlighting the differences in local preparedness. “Citizens can feel secure based on current assessments, but if threat levels change, we will adapt,” he stated.
The situation reflects a broader issue across Denmark; since June 2024, when citizens were advised to prepare for crises lasting up to three days, municipalities have lacked clear guidelines or directives, leaving each to devise their own strategies. This absence of official requirements for urban disaster preparedness implicates social equity, as articulated by experts in the field.
Iben Bjørnsson, a lecturer at the Defence Academy, warned that without a unified approach, vulnerable citizens will experience disparate levels of care during crises. “The absence of national requirements creates a staggering inequality,” she noted. Similarly, Nina Blom Andersen, a senior research leader at the Copenhagen School of Professions, emphasized that the inconsistency in municipal plans could lead to varying support levels for citizens, depending on their locality.
During a recent parliamentary session, Torsten Schack Pedersen, Denmark’s Minister for Society Security and Preparedness, acknowledged the need to improve national guidance for municipal governments. “While each municipality should adapt to its unique circumstances, more specific and better guidance is essential,” he admitted, although he did not provide a definitive timeline for new policies.
As the global situation remains grim and unpredictable, many municipalities are grappling with the practicalities of ensuring their vulnerable populations are safeguarded. They are keenly aware of the need for emergency supplies, with questions such as whether to stockpile canned tuna and bottled water, and how many days’ worth of supplies are adequate causing confusion.
“Should we prep for three days? Eight days? And does this only apply to nursing homes?” several municipalities have echoed. The report indicates that local strategies differ greatly, leaving room for improvement.
Most notably, Syddjurs Kommune stands out by mandating care facilities to secure enough provisions to last at least three days without access to water, heat, or electricity, a comprehensive approach that others still need to adopt. Meanwhile, in Sønderborg, the lack of such measures has alarmed some experts who evaluate crisis management readiness across the nation.
Michael Stegger Jensen’s call for clarity resonates widely among other local leaders. He said it would be beneficial to have uniform guidelines so that resource allocation does not become dependent on the financial capabilities of each municipality. “It shouldn’t be left up to individual municipalities,” he stressed. “It leads to inequality based on resource availability.”
The need for a national preparedness plan has been emphasized repeatedly by local leaders like Erik Lauritzen. He believes central government support could streamline the process and ensure that every municipality meets a certain standard of preparedness. “We need concrete instructions about what to prepare for on a communal level,” he suggested. “If the state mandates a standard, municipalities will respond accordingly.”
Echoing these sentiments, Johannes Lundsfryd Jensen, chairman of the Climate and Environment Committee in the Municipalities’ Association, articulated the desire for clarity from the central government: “We’re lacking a national statement on the scenarios we should be preparing for,” he said. Historical precedent indicates that crisis management should be an organized endeavor rather than a piecemeal effort across almost 100 diverse municipalities.
The consequences of an unclear national directive could ultimately lead to varying quality levels in emergency response, as multiple municipalities podcast potential calamities differently, and this inconsistency may put lives at risk during critical junctures.
In the wake of growing demands for national assistance, the Minister underscored the need for better access to resources and guidance mechanisms at the municipal level. However, Pedersen expressed reluctance toward enforcing a standardized model, believing that a tailored approach is more effective given the diversity of municipalities. “We need to support varied approaches to how each municipality is structured and solves these challenges,” he asserted, without providing a strict timeline for the rollout of improved support.
In closing, as Denmark prepares for potential crises, the debates surrounding municipal readiness will likely intensify, ultimately challenging the state to consider formal requirements for emergency preparedness in all municipalities.
